arXiv:2602. 15983v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural language into optimization code, but silent failures pose a critical risk: code that executes and returns solver-feasible solutions may encode semantically incorrect formulations---a feasibility--correctness gap reaching 90 percentage points on compositional problems.
By Junbo Jacob Lian, Yujun Sun, Huiling Chen, Chaoyu Zhang, Hanzhang Qin, Chung-Piaw Teo
The paper introduces Constraint‑Guided Enterprise Data Mapping (CGM), a neuro‑symbolic approach that uses schema‑grounded admissibility constraints to steer large language models (LLMs) in aligning enterprise data. CGM operates in three stages: defining constraints with metadata, generating candidates under relaxed constraints to ensure feasibility, and ranking them with a bounded LLM. Experiments show that hard constraints dramatically reduce candidate space and improve F1 scores, enabling small models to match or surpass large LLMs at a fraction of the cost while reducing expert effort.
By Sebastian Monka, Pramod Anantharam, Thien Vo Minh, Lavdim Halilaj
arXiv:2607. 23386v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We document a failure class in frontier large language models -- exception chain collapse -- observed in eligibility evaluation under nested conditional rules of the form "A is required UNLESS B applies, UNLESS C overrides B".
By Paul Simpson, John Kozak, Lisa Doake
arXiv:2606. 18557v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A rule-based logic solver resolves every instance in our benchmark in under 50 microseconds with 100% accuracy; the best frontier language model reaches 65% at best and drops to 23.
By Patrick Cooper, Alvaro Velasquez
arXiv:2608. 12426v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed in settings that require simultaneous adherence to multiple explicit constraints - reasoning structure, safety boundaries, output schemas.
By Mariya I. Vasileva
arXiv:2607. 09706v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models turn a worded situation into a numeric plan, and the dominant pipelines (NL4Opt, OptiMUS, ORLM, OR-LLM-Agent) commit to a single objective and point-valued coefficients, then solve once.
By Suyash Mishra
arXiv:2608. 02641v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural-language optimization problems into solver-ready formulations, but direct code generation is brittle: schema, indexing, and semantic errors can cause compilation failures, infeasible models, or incorrect objectives, while iterative repair, search, and multi-agent workflows increase inference cost.
By Penglin Zhu, Linhai Zhang, Jungang Xu, Xinchi Wei, Xiuqi Wu
SemVerBench is a benchmark that evaluates how well large language models (LLMs) understand and apply version-constraint resolution semantics, such as determining whether a version satisfies constraints like ^1.2.3 or >=2.0. The study finds that many models struggle with certain corner cases, with GPT‑5.1 performing poorly while Claude and Opus perform much better. The authors suggest that the failures stem from an activation/application gap rather than a lack of knowledge, and recommend that coding agents delegate version resolution to a dedicated resolver tool.
By Qibai Chen, Zeming Liu
The paper introduces a benchmark for evaluating whether off‑the‑shelf small language models (SLMs) can reliably perform microtasks that support a large language model (LLM) planner, such as auto‑approving shell commands, writing memory, selecting tools, and ranking past turns. Using fixed prompts and confidence‑interval‑aware eligibility thresholds, the authors test several Qwen3 models (0.6/1.7/4/8 B) in FP16 with no tuning and find that none of the 16 configurations meet the eligibility criteria. Quantization to 4‑bit precision further degrades performance, with the eligibility gap tracking model size rather than precision, and the issue persists across different models (e.g., Llama‑3.x) and prompt variations.
By Jundong Hu, Shekar Ramachandran
arXiv:2609.16145v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: We study a practical question: can a small correction module fix errors in a frozen language model's outputs without degrading its base capabilities? W...
By Gautam Kishore
arXiv:2510. 03520v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Ensuring safety is a foundational requirement for large language models (LLMs).
By Kartik Pandit, Sourav Ganguly, Arnesh Banerjee, Shaahin Angizi, Arnob Ghosh
arXiv:2603. 25450v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Detecting when a language model is wrong without ground truth labels is a fundamental challenge for safe deployment.
By Matt Gorbett, Suman Jana